First to set the Scenario for my question PC is in combat with NPC, PC is using a vibrosword and NPC is using a SMG. PC runs up to NPC and strikes with the sword NPC defends using Dodge+Reaction. On the NPCs turn he decides to shoot the PC and the PC is not on full defense, what does the PC use to defend? (Just Reaction, Reaction+Weapon Skill, Reaction+Dodge, or Reaction+Unarmed Combat)

As far as I can tell by RAW you only get to defend with reaction because the NPC is using a ranged weapon.








I also find this statement quite Odd(Particularly the bold section):

I fail to see a question...

The question or point is that only using your reaction does not make sense as the defender should be able to swat the gun out of the way or something along those lines but as far as I can tell RAW says that you cant do that. Is my understanding correct that when defending against a ranged weapon, even when engaged in melee with the attacker, you only get to use your reaction to defend? Or have I missed something?

You would only get your Reaction. The key to preventing this is as always going first and performing an appropriate maneuver such as Break Weapon, Clinch, or Disarm, all of which would prevent effective use of the weapon in question. Regardless the Attacker receives a -3 modifier for attempting a ranged attack while engaged in melee.

Reaction or reaction+dodge if you do a full defense.
Though they do get a -3 for being in melee range.

If the NPC is close enough, there is also +2 point blank modifier.

There is also another possible (and rather goofy) interpretation. As the book says, "Melee combat weapons are any weapons wielded by combatants within a few meters of each other."

Any weapons wielded by combatants within a few meters of each other, whether they be knives, swords, chainsaws, handguns, shotguns, sniper rifles, rail guns, whatever. Blatant abuse of RAW, but not unwarranted (as said, you should be able to swat the gun away or otherwise defend).

Works for me

but not if He's in Melee than he gets -3

with a Dance in Melee
Medicineman

I'd also go with the interpretation that if you're in melee, then even if you have a gun your target gets to defend with melee skills. I'd allow them to use either melee or unarmed combat, unless you're using your rifle's butt like a club.

Further, yes, I'd give the -3 penalty to anyone using a weapon (UNLESS they're using pistols and skilled with gun-fu, which I allow as a melee specialisation).

thats what Firefight's for

Hough !
Medicineman

Don't both modifiers apply, resulting in a total of -1?

Nope
at least not in the german Arsenal.
there is an explicit Sentence:(roughly translated by me)
Please regard that this Modifier(Point Blank) will be nullified by the Mod Attacker in Melee
That Means (at least for Me )that as soon as You are in a Melee You don't get the Point Blank Mod but the Attacker in Melee Mod

HokaHey
Medicineman

Didn't they update that in the German SR4A Corebook? Don't know about the English, only got the German rulebook I'm afraid.

Yeah, they do.

Yes. Both modifiers count. Total is -1.

"Note that this may be offset by the Attacker in Melee Combat modifier."

Offset means, that they count against each other, effectively canceling each other out (at least partially).

Bye
Thanee

Indeed, by RAW shooting point blank but not melee is at +2, but in melee and point blank a net modifier of -1.

Personally, I favor discarding that -3 for shooting in melee and instead letting the defender defend with close combat skills. Given the amount of extremely-close range firefights a 'runner is likely to end up in, this makes close combat skills more useful.

I do not allow pointblank to apply if the shooters target is engaging the shooter in melee.

To my group, the -2 shoot in melee modifier represents holding the gun close to your body to prevent it from being swiped/attacked in melee. We have a houserule stating that you can ignore the -2 shooting in melee penalty, but in return the defender gets to add their Unarmed/Melee Weapon skill to their defense test.

To me it makes sense that alot of mooks with guns without alot of melee experience would use the option to ignore the penalty since the people they are used to shooting do not have mad unarmed skills. It takes a bit of experience to dodge and shoot in melee methinks.

That is an elegant house rule, and I think I might adopt it myself.